|Publication number||US7558315 B2|
|Application number||US 10/893,826|
|Publication date||Jul 7, 2009|
|Filing date||Jul 19, 2004|
|Priority date||Dec 7, 2003|
|Also published as||CA2548736A1, CN1914855A, CN1914855B, CN102710445A, CN102710445B, EP1700423A2, EP1700423B1, EP2187558A2, EP2187558A3, EP2187558B1, EP2259495A1, EP2259495B1, EP2259564A1, US7302379, US7711530, US20050123027, US20050123028, US20080071516, WO2005057857A2, WO2005057857A3|
|Publication number||10893826, 893826, US 7558315 B2, US 7558315B2, US-B2-7558315, US7558315 B2, US7558315B2|
|Inventors||John M. Cioffi, Wonjong Rhee|
|Original Assignee||Adaptive Spectrum And Signal Alignment, Inc.|
|Export Citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Patent Citations (54), Non-Patent Citations (53), Referenced by (8), Classifications (56), Legal Events (3)|
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet|
This application claims the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) of U.S. Provisional No. 60/527,853 filed on Dec. 7, 2003, entitled DYNAMIC MANAGEMENT OF COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety for all purposes
1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates generally to methods, systems and apparatus for managing digital communication systems. More specifically, this invention relates to adaptive control of various transmission parameters, including but not limited to maximum transmit power spectral density, maximum aggregate transmission power, transmission band preference, minimum and maximum receiver margin, frequency-dependent bit-loading and power controls and/or bit-loading restrictions in communication systems such as DSL systems.
2. Description of Related Art
Digital subscriber line (DSL) technologies provide potentially large bandwidth for digital communication over existing telephone subscriber lines (referred to as loops and/or the copper plant). Telephone subscriber lines can provide this bandwidth despite their original design for only voice-band analog communication. In particular, asymmetric DSL (ADSL) can adjust to the characteristics of the subscriber line by using a discrete multitone (DMT) line code that assigns a number of bits to each tone (or sub-carrier), which can be adjusted to channel conditions as determined during training and initialization of the modems (typically transceivers that function as both transmitters and receivers) at each end of the subscriber line. The adaptive assignment can be continued during live data transmission on channels or lines that vary with time using a process often referred to as “bit-swapping” that uses a secure relatively low-speed reverse channel to inform the transmitter of assignment changes.
Impulse noise, other noise and other sources of error can substantially impact the accuracy of data transmitted by ADSL and other communications systems. Various techniques have been developed for reducing, avoiding and/or repairing the damage done to data by such error during transmission. These error reduction/avoidance/repair techniques have performance costs for a communication system in which they are used. As is well known in the art, inadequate power transmission levels lead to errors because the transmission power is not high enough to overcome noise and other interference in a given channel. These errors lead to lost data and/or the need for re-transmission of data, sometimes multiple times. To prevent such errors, systems utilize extra transmission power that results in margins above a known or calculated signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) that assures compliance with an acceptable error rate.
Generally, DSL modem pairs determine power, margin and other operational characteristics of the pair during initialization, training, channel analysis and exchange phases before full operation (sometimes referred to as SHOWTIME). The process starts with a base power spectral density (PSD) value or mask. This may be a “flat” or constant value (that is, frequency independent) or may be a variable mask where the PSD value is frequency-specific or frequency-dependent. There is an initial PSD value in various DSLs (sometimes referred to as “NOMPSD”) and typically an upper limit for NOMPSD is defined by an applicable standard for a given country. Using this initial PSD value, the modems estimate line attenuation and line length (and perhaps other parameters and/or values).
Using the line attenuation and length estimates, one or both modems can define a power drop, or power cut-back (PCB) value, that reduces the initial PSD value. As noted below, different DSL standards set and adjust power (PSD and PCB, for example) according to different rules, if the standards are indeed observed and obeyed at all.
Using the once-adjusted PSD value (sometimes referred to as REFPSD=PSD−PCB), the modems compute the bit-loading (bi), gains (gi) and margin during the channel analysis phase. The gains gi are adjustments to individual bit-loaded tones' transmit power levels in the DMT scheme, providing a relatively uniform margin for transmission of data on the line. The gains can be adjusted during SHOWTIME to reflect changing line conditions, etc., but may be very limited as to the amount of adjustment and the way such gains adjustments can be performed.
Depending on the equipment manufacturer and the DSL standard being used, compliance with each standard's rules and guidelines and/or other appropriate operational limits varies from strict compliance by some parties (usually leading to very conservative or timid setting of DSL service rates in operation) to grave disregard for even basic operational guidelines and rules. In many cases, whether through intentional or inadvertent non-compliance, excessive power and/or margins are used in an attempt to avoid problems that can arise from too little of either or both.
Excessively high power transmission levels, however, lead to other problems. For example, one or more lines' use of excessive transmission power can generate strong crosstalk problems and interference in nearby lines. Crosstalk is unwanted interference and/or signal noise electromagnetically passed between lines that share the same or adjacent binders. In addition, use of transmission power above necessary levels also means that the communication system is operated more expensively, to the detriment of all users. Following is a brief summary of existing standards and practices for several modes of DSL service to which embodiments of the invention disclosed below may apply, including nuances that differentiate each particular standard from the more generic initialization, training, channel analysis and exchange procedure discussed above.
ADSL1-G.992.1 Standard (Also Referred to Herein as the “ADSL1 Standard” or “ADSL1”):
(1) Has a MAXSNRM maximum margin (or equivalent) limit setting that can be specified by operators, but the capability to observe and implement this limit varies with modem manufacturers and interpretations of the standard, with the result that it is often effectively ignored. Generally, an “operator” is a telecom or other service provider who operates the network and provides the service itself. Internet service providers are not generally considered operators because they usually subcontract the service to another party.
(2) ATU-R (downstream receiver) and ATU-C (upstream receiver) are limited to 14.5 dB maximum gain reduction request, which often is insufficient to implement the intent of MAXSNRM. Furthermore some ATU-R modems ignore MAXSNRM and there has never been an interoperability test to declare such modems non-compliant with G.992.1 that actually verifies the margin does not exceed MAXSNRM.
(3) Downstream ATU-C transmitters reduce power by up to 12 dB according to algorithms in the annexes of G.992.1 (the most popular of which are Annexes A, B, and C) if the early-training received upstream signals are large, indicating that the loop is short. The algorithms of Annexes A, B, and C are blind to downstream channel-output noise, and so are very “timid” in reducing power and almost always do not reduce power nearly enough—for instance, the widely used Annex A algorithm only applies to lines less than 3000 feet in length and thus fails to accommodate many situations in which longer lines might need power reduction as well.
(4) An initial, flat PSD upper bound or “mask” can be programmed according to a MAXNOMPSD parameter, which is between −40 and −52 dBm/Hz in 2 dB steps. The MAXNOMPSD value is set by the operator and is the maximum value that NOMPSD can assume at the initiation of transceiver training. The modem manufacturer can set a modem to use a lower NOMPSD value, in which case NOMPSD<MAXNOMPSD. The MIB/telcom operator can only set MAXNOMPSD in earlier systems, but cannot force the NOMPSD value itself. In ADSL1, NOMPSD is communicated during training to the receiver (for subsequent attenuation calculation) by the transmitter. Again, there is no MIB parameter that directly specifies NOMPSD in ADSL1. Usually, MAXNOMPSD is the NOMPSD that is used in the very first transceiver training phase of ADSL1, but the NOMPSD level (only restricted to be less than or equal to MAXNOMPSD) is decided by the modem manufacturer in design and not the operator. Thus, by setting MAXNOMPSD the operator is assured that NOMPSD will be reduced to an upper limit level of NOMPSD−2nPCB dBm/Hz, as defined, with nPCB=0 to 6 (that is, if NOMPSD is −40, then PSD power can be dropped by 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 or 12 dB).
(5) Some manufacturers' ATU-R receivers ignore the MAXSNRM altogether and never request the 14.5 dB power reduction despite such power reduction being mandated by the operator and by standards.
(6) Gain swapping during live operation may be limited and recommended but not required in Annex A) to allow only +/−2.5 dB gain adjustments after training in SHOWTIME. Thus, gain swapping is limited in some modems to a total of +/−2.5 dB in ADSL1. If gain is not reduced enough in training for any reason (for example, a spurious noise was present), then further lowering will not occur unless the modem retrains. A record of retrains (a retrain count) may be maintained by the DSL system as an indication of how many retrains are performed in a given period of time and as an indication that the MAXSNRM level might be set too low if the retrain count is high. Gain-swaps are applied successively in ADSL1 (so that they build upon one another), but the total gain reduction of any SHOWTIME succession of gain swaps is often limited to a maximum of +/−2.5 dB with respect to training. Some vendors, however, do request a succession of gain reductions that lead to the full ADSL 1-allowed gain reduction of −14.5 dB during SHOWTIME. When asking for lower than −2.5 dB changes, the receivers in such full-range gain-swap systems need to be smart enough to adjust internal signal processing to prevent intersymbol interference from the fixed synch symbol (that is never reduced in power during SHOWTIME by gain swaps, unlike the other 68 live-data symbols). Some deficient receivers ask for the power reduction, but then fail to adjust themselves internally when a lower than −2.5 dB gain reduction is implemented (and operators do not easily know on which lines these deficient receivers are located). Such a deficient ATU-R then drops the DSL connection because it assumes the line went bad, when, instead, the problem is due to the ATU-R's faulty implementation of asking for a gain reduction it cannot handle. Due to this problem, service providers may force DSLAM providers to always ignore power reduction requests that exceed the +/−2.5 dB range during live operation (and do so network wide because they do not know where the deficient receivers are located, thus limiting also all good receivers). This further limits power reduction if the service provider selects this option to not have to change the deficient receivers already deployed in their network.
ADSL2-G.992.3 Standard (Also Referred to Herein as the “ADSL2 Standard” or “ADSL2”):
(1) Has a MAXSNRM setting, but this function still is left to a DSL receiver to implement.
(2) The ATU-R (as the downstream receiver) and ATU-C (as the upstream receiver) are limited to a 14.5 dB maximum power reduction request for gain settings, which are now set absolutely in gain swaps and not done relative to last gain swap. The range is now from −14.5 to [+2.5+EXTGI], so it still is limited to a maximum power reduction of 14.5 dB (EXTGI≧0, and usually is equal to 0; EXTGI is something the transmitter tells the receiver during early training it can accommodate during later gain swapping). A larger EXTGI of up to the limit of 18 dB allows a modem that has reduced power for any reason to increase its power during live operation to respond to a new larger noise that may have occurred during live operation.
(3) Power Cut Back (PCB) in ADSL2 allows the receiver to reduce power (only during training) by an additional 0, 1, . . . , 40 dB, so the ability to observe MAXSNRM is improved. The ADSL2 standard provides that the largest PCB requested by either transmitter or receiver should then be implemented. MAXNOMPSD is still only one operator-controlled parameter in ADSL2 that applies to the entire band, but a wider range of this parameter is accommodated in ADSL2 than in ADSL1.
(4) The initial flat PSD mask can be programmed according to a MAXNOMPSD parameter, which is between −40 (and −37 in certain reach-extended Annexes of ADSL2 known as READSL) and −60 dBm/Hz in 0.1 dB steps.
(5) Some manufacturers' ATU-R receivers may still ignore power back off and it is unfortunately not tested, even in the DSL Forum's new test procedure called WT-85 (though there is a test, nearly all would pass it and there is no verification in that test that the MAXSNRM is observed). No band preference (that is frequency-dependent imposition of a PSDMASK) is possible in the ADSL2 standard itself.
(6) Gain swapping during live SHOWTIME is no longer limited to +/−2.5 dB and all symbols (there is still a synch symbol every 69th) have the same level. However, only gain-swapping of up to a reduction −14.5 dB relative to training levels (not last level as in ADSL1) is possible. A gain increase of up to 2.5+EXTGI is particularly useful if the modem started at very low power and a noise arose. If EXTGI is large, then the modem can recover without retraining. EXTGI is limited to 18.0 dB in ADSL2.
ADSL2+-G.992.5 Standard (Also Referred to Herein as the “ADSL2+ Standard” or “ADSL2+”):
(1) Same as ADSL2, except for the introduction of the PSDMASK parameter that is implemented through the tssi parameters. The tssi are additional parameters like the gains in gain swapping, except that the tssi can be fixed externally.
VDSL1, VDSL2, HDSL and SHDSL
The current version of the proposed VDSL1 standard, or G.993.1 has limited definition of MIB-controlled (or operator-controlled) procedures for power reduction (the DSLAM or line terminal (LT) modem manufacturer has a complete PSDMASK specification internally but access to it via MIB is at best not-yet-well-defined in G.993.1). An enumeration of the G.993.1 standard's maintenance capabilities appears in DSL Forum Document TR-057, however the MIB controlled section of TR-057 is currently empty. Thus, VDSL has no standardized mechanism for setting MAXNOMPSD externally, but does have an internal mechanism for reducing power in 0.25 dB steps (called manual power control) between 0 and 40 dB for upstream and 0 and 12 dB for downstream, with respect to nominally imposed standard limits (there are two mask levels and corresponding transmit power levels downstream and upstream that can be set programmably in G.993.1 compliant modems—so the power reduction is with respect to these, some of which are not yet specified). VDSL also specifies a MAXSNRM (but again it is not clear who specifies this). Thus, VDSL has many of the same capabilities as ADSL1 and ADSL2/2+. These capabilities may become standardized for operator interface in an MIB in future documents that could allow many of the same capabilities as ADSL1, ADSL2 and ADSL2+. However, VDSL1 also does not have the rich set of reported diagnostics of ADSL2 and ADSL2+, or apparently even ADSL1, so the ability to diagnose a problem accurately may be more difficult. Again, future generations of TR057 or G.997.x may address these deficiencies of current VDSL MIB interfaces.
VDSL2 is still in very early stages, but it appears that it will have essentially the same MIB features as ADSL2+. HDSL does not appear in any form to have any power back off features. HDSL (now upgraded to SHDSL, G.991.2) has a target SNR (or TSNRM) and a reported SNRM, but no MAXSNRM. The bandwidth is fixed for any of a few data rates (basically 384, 768, 1.5, 3, . . . ) symmetric and the same modulation in both directions with some standardized shaping. A flat PCB of 0, . . . , 31 dB can be imposed. There is no FEC to protect against impulses at all, so it is unlikely that PCB is used much. Moreover, SHDSL tends to run at the maximum rate possible on short lines, so its margin typically will be close to the TSNRM of 6 dB.
DSM Report, still in its draft stages, currently has all the MIB capabilities of ADSL2+ in it in both directions, and applies to all DMT transmission methods, ADSL1 through VDSL2 and beyond. FEC also can be specified.
As will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, in many DSL systems, including ADSL1 and ADSL2 systems, operational characteristics and rules typically have been set for a static mode of operation to accommodate worst-case scenarios in the systems. That is, users do not always realize the full benefits of DSL systems because of inadequate standards, equipment limitations and the deficiencies of generally accepted operational procedures and conventions. For example, power-margin limits are rarely observed or may be in conflict with or between various standards or interpretations of those standards. Such disregard for service-provider-imposed and/or standards-decreed limits creates problems for users, including excessive crosstalk. Similarly, impulse noise can be a significant problem in some DSL systems. To address impulse noise, current systems use manufacturer-supplied default settings for many operating parameters (such as margin). The applicable standards intended to allow the service provider to set these parameters, yet they may or may not be implemented properly by the various vendors' DSL modems or equipment.
Even where a majority of users (that is, their modems) in a binder are standards compliant, a single user can prove to be a significant source of service deterioration or other damage to other users' DSL service. For this reason, while the standards have provided guidance, even minimal non-compliance can present significant problems in current systems.
Static operation (for example, when DSL service uses manufacturer-set default settings in a DSL modem) means that the DSL service cannot adjust and/or adapt to changing line and environmental conditions in the subscriber line, again forgoing and/or diminishing the benefits available in such DSL systems and failing to realize the potential available to one or more users in such systems. As will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, the widely varying standards, equipment, implementation rules (or lack thereof) and practices mean that, despite detailed standards concerning operation of these various DSL systems, consistent service and service quality is challenging. Because the modems and other equipment may or may not actually comply with the appropriate standards and, as or more importantly, the fact that a user's neighboring lines may or may not use standards-compliant equipment and practices, many users suffer poor or less than optimal service.
Systems, devices, methods and techniques that allow users to adjust and adapt transmission power margin(s), power spectral densities, and the like dynamically to changing DSL environmental and operational situations would represent a significant advancement in the field of DSL operation. Moreover, monitoring and evaluation of the power, margins, etc. used in the DSL environment and operation by an independent entity can assist, guide and (in some cases) control users' activities and equipment, and likewise would represent a significant advancement in the field of DSL operation.
Controlling margins in a DSL modem pair is based on collected operational data. The operational data is analyzed and at least one modem in the modem pair is instructed to use a margin-related parameter value calculated to assist the modem pair in meeting a margin target, such as a margin limit imposed by a DSL standard or the like. Embodiments of the present invention can be used in connection with ADSL1, ADSL2, ADSL2+, VDSL and other types of DSL systems and equipment.
A controller, such as a DSM Center, a “smart” modem and/or computer system can be used to collect and analyze the operational data. The controller and/or other components can be a computer-implemented device or combination of devices. In some embodiments, the controller is in a location remote from the modems. In other cases, the controller may be collocated with one of or both of the modems as equipment directly connected to a modem, thus creating a “smart” modem.
The margin-related parameter value may be a PSD-related value, such as the MAXNOMPSD or MAXNOMATP parameter used by various ADSL systems. In some embodiments, the margin-related parameter value may be a shaped spectral mask for use in transmissions and/or may be caps or limits on bit loading for frequencies used in transmissions between the modems. In some cases, preference bands can be imposed to direct modems to favor and/or avoid certain frequencies.
The operational data may include historical data relating to prior performance of the modem pair and prior margin compliance. Also, the operational data may include one or more modem operational parameters that are the same as or different from the margin-related parameter whose value is regulated by the controller. The historical data may be maintained in a database. The operational data may further include data collected from the DSL system in which the modem pair operate, for example from one more MIBs or other data sources. The operational data may be sent to the controller by communication means internal and/or external to the DSL system itself. Some other types of operational data that can be evaluated include data pertaining to crosstalk between the modem pair and neighboring DSL lines, a history of margins previously used by the modem pair, retrain counts (that indicate that MAXSNRM may be set too low if the retrain count levels are high), transmit power levels previously used by the modem pair, data rates previously used by the modem pair, and/or data regarding previous error behavior of the modem pair.
In another embodiment of the invention, a distribution of margins based on operational data may be estimated as a function of data rate. Using the estimated margin distribution, a distribution of performance parameters also is calculated, including the probabilities of line outages and probabilities of one or more error parameters exceeding minimum levels. Data rates and/or other performance-related parameters may be set on the basis of the estimated performance of the system using various margin settings and levels.
Methods according to the present invention may be performed by a controller, a DSM Center, a “smart” modem, a computer system and the like. Moreover, computer program products for performing these methods also are disclosed.
Further details and advantages of the invention are provided in the following Detailed Description and the associated Figures.
The present invention will be readily understood by the following detailed description in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, wherein like reference numerals designate like structural elements, and in which:
The following detailed description of the invention will refer to one or more embodiments of the invention, but is not limited to such embodiments. Rather, the detailed description is intended only to be illustrative. Those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that the detailed description given herein with respect to the Figures is provided for explanatory purposes as the invention extends beyond these illustrative embodiments.
It should be kept in mind that the specifics provided herein are for purposes of illustration and that the present invention is broader than any one example. Therefore, the present invention should be construed as broadly as possible and permitted.
Generally, embodiments of the present invention will be described in connection with the operation of a DSL system having a controller (for example, a computer system, a “smart” modem, a dynamic spectrum manager, a Spectrum Management Center (SMC), and/or a Dynamic Spectrum Management Center (DSM Center) as described in publications and other documents relating to this field, or any other suitable control device and/or entity, including a computer system). When the term “controller” is used herein, it is intended to mean any or all of these or any other suitable control means. A controller may be a single unit or combination of components that are a computer-implemented system, device or combination of devices that perform the functions described below.
As will be appreciated by the those skilled in the art, after reading the present disclosure, embodiments of the present invention may be adapted to operate in various DSL and other communication systems known to those skilled in the art. A dynamic spectrum manager or other controller managing a communication system using one or more embodiments of the present invention may be a service provider and/or operator (which in some case may be a CLEC, ILEC or other service provider) or may be a party partially or completely independent of the system operator(s).
Generally, when more parameters are monitored and are adjustable in a communication system, rather than being statically set, performance can be improved, often dramatically (for example, higher data rates can be realized, more users can be serviced, less power may be consumed, etc.). That is, if system settings are set adaptively as a function of the performance history of a line or channel, adaptive changes to system operation can improve the data rates and other service for users. As an example, no system currently exists for dynamically monitoring a large number of parameters, characteristics, etc. and assisting operators and users in optimizing DSL services. Some operators have constructed rudimentary forms of collecting DSL line data and have attempted either:
In particular, the rules for increasing or decreasing data rates in these systems often are oversimplified, fixed functions of one or very few input parameters. Systems according to embodiments of the present invention that accept and analyze more inputs and become, in essence, dynamic functions of a few parameters based on the observation and processing of the many other observed parameters and history of the line performance constitute a significant improvement in this field.
To reduce performance problems of various types, including crosstalk interference, many communication systems limit the power that may be used by transmitters sending data within a given system. The margin of a transmission system is the level of transmit power (typically expressed in dB) over the minimum power needed to achieve a desired performance (for example, a threshold bit error rate, or BER, of the system). The basic goal is to use sufficient power to overcome and/or compensate for noise-induced errors and interference-induced errors, while minimizing the power needed for transmission to reduce the potential problems occasioned by excessive levels of transmission power. In many cases, however, equipment manufacturers, system operators and others use such excessive power (leading to excessive margins) in an effort to provide high data rates and to take an easier approach to dealing with potential problems like crosstalk.
The present invention uses information about line characteristics (for example, operational data) to more carefully evaluate acceptable problem/interference avoidance and data rates in power adaptive systems and methodologies. This is done by analyzing the available information and/or operational data and then training and setting modems to operate at power transmit levels (and thus margins) that will provide sufficient power for acceptable data transmission while minimizing the deleterious effects that one user's line might have on other users' lines. More specifically, embodiments of the present invention can generate margin-related parameters and instruct at least one modem in a modem pair to use one or more such margin-related parameters to assist the modem pair in meeting a given margin target.
The G.997.1 standard specifies the physical layer management for ADSL transmission systems based on the clear, embedded operation channel (EOC) defined in G.997.1 and use of indicator bits and EOC messages defined in G.992.x standards. Moreover, G.997.1 specifies network management elements content for configuration, fault and performance management. In performing these functions, the system utilizes a variety of operational data (which includes performance data) that is available at an access node (AN).
Each ATU-R in a system is coupled to an ATU-C in a CO or other central location. In
Several of the interfaces shown in
At the U-interface (which is essentially loop 130), there are two management interfaces, one at ATU-C 142 (the U-C interface 157) and one at ATU-R 122 (the U-R interface 158). Interface 157 provides ATU-C near-end parameters for ATU-R 122 to retrieve over the U-interface 130. Similarly, interface 158 provides ATU-R near-end parameters for ATU-C 142 to retrieve over the U-interface 130. The parameters that apply may be dependent upon the transceiver standard being used (for example, G.992.1 or G.992.2). The G.997.1 standard specifies an optional OAM communication channel across the U-interface. If this channel is implemented, ATU-C and ATU-R pairs may use it for transporting physical layer OAM messages. Thus, the transceivers 122, 142 of such a system share various operational data maintained in their respective MIBs.
As will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, at least some of the parameters described in these documents can be used in connection with embodiments of the present invention. Moreover, at least some of the system descriptions are likewise applicable to embodiments of the present invention. Various types of operational data available from a DSL NMS can be found therein; others may be known to those skilled in the art.
In a typical topology of a DSL plant, in which a number of transceiver pairs are operating and/or available, part of each subscriber loop is collocated with the loops of other users within a multi-pair binder (or bundle). After the pedestal, very close to the Customer Premises Equipment (CPE), the loop takes the form of a drop wire and exits the bundle. Therefore, the subscriber loop traverses two different environments. Part of the loop may be located inside a binder, where the loop is sometimes shielded from external electromagnetic interference, but is subject to crosstalk. After the pedestal, the drop wire is often unaffected by crosstalk due to its being far from other active pairs for most of the drop, but transmission can also be more significantly impaired by electromagnetic interference because the drop wires are unshielded. Many drops have 2 to 8 twisted-pairs within them and in situations of multiple services to a home or bonding (multiplexing and demultiplexing of a single service) of those lines, additional substantial crosstalk can occur between these lines in the drop segment.
A generic, exemplary DSL deployment scenario in which embodiments of the present invention can be used is shown in
The loops 227 of the remaining M users 292 are copper twisted pairs only, a scenario referred to as Fiber to the Exchange (FTTEx). Whenever possible and economically feasible, FTTCab is preferable to FTTEx, since this reduces the length of the copper part of the subscriber loop, and consequently increases the achievable rates. The existence of FTTCab loops can create problems to FTTEx loops. Moreover, FTTCab is expected to become an increasingly popular topology in the future. This type of topology can lead to substantial crosstalk interference and may mean that the lines of the various users have different data carrying and performance capabilities due to the specific environment in which they operate. The topology can be such that fiber-fed “cabinet” lines and exchange lines can be mixed in the same binder. Users L+1 to L+M could be a Remote terminal (instead of CO) and the users 1 to L could be even closer to customers, perhaps serviced by a line terminal or some other fiber fed terminal (thus two fiber fed terminals with one closer to customers than the others).
As can be seen in
According to one embodiment of the present invention shown in
In the exemplary system of
Analyzing means 340 and/or monitoring/collecting means 320 may also be coupled to a source 345 of margin performance or history, such as a database or memory that may or may not be part of the analyzer 300 or controller 310. One or more of the analyzer's connections allows the analyzer 300 to collect operational data. Data may be collected once (for example, during a single transceiver training) or over time. In some cases, the monitoring means 320 will collect data on a periodic basis, though it also can collect data on-demand or any other non-periodic basis, thus allowing the analyzer 300 to update its user and line data, if desired.
The analyzing means 340 is capable of analyzing data provided to it to determine whether instructions need to be sent to one or more modems to assist the modems in meeting a given margin target. The analyzing means 340 of analyzer 300 is coupled to an instruction-signal generating means 350 in the controller 310. Signal generator 350 is configured to accept a margin-related parameter value generated by the analyzing means 340 for use by a modem, where the margin-related parameter value is based on the operational data and is calculated to assist at least one modem in meeting a margin target, and to send instruction signals (for example, a requested or required MAXNOMPSD value, PSDMASK setting or other instructions such as CARMASK, MAXSNRM, MINSNRM, TSNRM, MAXNOMATP, MAXRXPWR, or any of the rate-adaptive margins or timers) to users in the communication system (for example, ADSL transceivers such as ATU-Cs). As indicated by the dashed line 347, the instruction signal generating means 350 may or may not be part of the analyzer 300 and/or be implemented in the same hardware, such as a computer system. Instruction signal generator 350 constitutes a means for regulating one or more margin-related parameter values in the modem pair.
As will be appreciated by those skilled in the art, if the controller is a wholly independent entity (that is, not owned and/or operated by the company owning and/or operating lines within the CO), much of the DSL system's configuration and operational information may be unavailable. Even in cases where a CLEC or ILEC operates and/or functions as the controller 310, much of this data may be unknown. Various techniques may be used for estimating needed data and/or information. One example of such techniques can be found in U.S. Ser. No. 10/817,128, entitled DSL SYSTEM ESTIMATION AND PARAMETER RECOMMENDATION, filed Apr. 2, 2004, and owned by Adaptive Spectrum and Signal Alignment, Inc., which is incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes.
In some embodiments of the present invention, the analyzer 300 may be implemented in a computer such as a PC, workstation or the like (one example of which is disclosed in connection with
The configuration of
ADSL field operations have taught that modems, while frequently claiming compliance with a plethora of emerging, volatile DSL standards, often interpret all the various quantities, rules and guidelines in different ways for different manufacturers (and, indeed, for different generations and versions of the same manufacturer's hardware and software). Moreover, various interoperability tests, including those currently near release, do not adequately address all the various possible configurations and power levels, leaving wide uncertainty as to actual field conditions. Using the present invention, a controller imposes and enforces consistent operational guidelines and implementations to reduce, increase and/or maintain power and/or PSD levels to prevent problems such as excessive crosstalk between modems. Furthermore, the controller can experiment with various settings not normally imposed by or during expected operation of standard-compliant products to ascertain the cause/effect and time variation of DSL environments so that combinations of rate/performance/price offerings for DSL service to customers in binders with varying degrees of crosstalk and customer topology can produce maximum service performance and/or revenue.
Time variation information and techniques correspond to ADSL2 modes known as dynamic rate adaptation. The specific parameters in G.997.1 for this are known as RA-USNRMus/ds and RA-DSNRMus/ds (rate adaptive upshift/downshift signal-to-noise-ration margin, upstream or downstream) and allow setting of a margin target that must be achieved before the rate can go up or down. RA-USNRMus is a level to which the modem's computed margin is compared. If that computed margin exceeds USNRMus for a period of RA-UTIME or longer, then the data rate can be increased without retraining in ADSL2. After the rate increase, the margin will be less than before the rate increase. If the computed margin is now less than USNRMus, then the modem's computed margin is compared to RA-DSNRMus and if greater than this value, the modem stays at the same data rate. If the margin now or at any time is below RA-DSNRMus for a time period exceeding RA-DTIMEus, the modem data rate is decreased until the margin again exceeds RA-DSNRMus. There will always be a maximum rate at which the rate-adaptation stops and then MAXSNRM applies there. The margin targets must be maintained for a time period specified by the DSM Center via another control-parameter RA-UTIMEus/ds or RADTIMEus/ds (rate adaptive upshift/downshift time, upstream or downstream).
Generally, as shown in flow diagram 700 of
Data may be collected using the DSL system's internal communication system(s) and/or using external communication (for example, the internet). The operational data might include information regarding one or more modem operational parameter values being used or set by the modem pair, which is collected at 720.
At 730 the controller analyzes the operational data to determine what margin-related parameter values might assist the modem pair in meeting a margin target or otherwise enhance performance of the modem pair. The controller may then generate a margin-related parameter value at 740. The margin-related parameter value may be for a modem operational parameter that the controller has considered or may be a different margin-related parameter. At 750 the controller generates an instruction signal representing the margin-related parameter value and sends that to at least one modem in the modem pair, thus instructing the modem pair to adopt the margin-related parameter value for use in training or in normal operation, depending on the circumstances.
The controller may update operation of the modem pair by performing such an analysis more than once, as shown by the dotted arrow in
The basic idea is that the spectrum level, power, spectrum shape, etc. may all be changed in response to reported margin history/distribution. In other words, after evaluating data about prior performance of a modem pair, and knowing one or more of the modem pair's margin-related parameters, a controller or the like can suggest or force the modem pair to adopt operational values that will assist the modems in meeting one or more margin targets, whether imposed by a standard or not.
In some embodiments of the present invention, a controller coupled to the ATU-C side of a modem pair dynamically controls margin settings and adjustments for each line (for example, in an ADSL2 system, by setting and/or changing the MAXSNRM parameter, by imposing a different MAXNOMPSD level, or by setting the PSDMASK in an ADSL2+ modem or by combinations of some or all of these, or some of the other parameters previously mentioned such as CARMASK, MAXSNRM, TSNRM, MINSNRM, RA-margins/timers). Such dynamic margin setting by imposition of a lower mask is not part of any standard. Even those that attempt to obey the margin and power rules may be limited by the range of PCB allowed or may be limited by not having available a history of information from earlier trainings and use of the line (possibly with other modems and/or other customers who may have previously resided at the end of the line). Thus, in another embodiment, the controller may see from a history of reported margin measurements that the line is exceeding a desired margin target and thereby impose a lower PSD level during or before training by the mechanisms discussed above. That has not been done in earlier systems because users and operators did not really know the anticipated performance level and thus did not want to unnecessarily weaken a modem in the event that it might see high noise during operation. Similarly, if for some reason a modem is not using sufficient power and/or margin and is experiencing excessive noise and error problems, the controller can instruct the modem to use a higher PSD level during training or operation to permit better operation.
As noted above, it may be preferable in some systems to use a historical, previously measured and/or known margin to “seed” the training process so that an appropriate power reduction is implemented during training. The controller can maintain or have access to a performance history, thus allowing the controller to continuously improve estimations and decisions concerning what PSD or other margin-related parameters to instruct the modem to use when the modem is reset or retrains (which can be forced or recommended, if appropriate). For example, a service provider or controller may wait until the line is inactive—for example, counting ATM cells or other customer information-passing measures to know when the line is active or not—and then reset to use the newer PSD(s) in a manner completely transparent to a user. In other situations, the service provider may simply retrain at a time when the system is very unlikely to be in use (for example, in the middle of the night). In some embodiments, the controller can use this historical information, telling the one or both of the modems in the modem pair (for example, the ATU-C) what initial PSD level should be used so that an available PCB value or other adjustment (for example, a −14.5 dBm drop by the ATU-R) has a chance of meeting the margin specification.
In some embodiments of the present invention, programming is based on either previous use(s) or training. The previous uses may be more important in some cases. A second pass through training, which also can be used, essentially is a quick fix for the modem vendors themselves, particularly for downstream transmission with the DSLAM vendors, where the modems can essentially stop the current training and then commence training from the beginning a second time with a different, lower NOMPSD that causes the margin then to be less than MAXSNRM.
Some embodiments of the present invention combine respecting the ADDNMR limit by initializing the PSDMASK setting using previous knowledge. Optimal Spectrum Management (OSM), which is known to those skilled in the art, has been studied and has shown some gains from Level-2-coordinated spectrum management by a dynamic spectrum manager, DSM Center or other controller over already large gains of theoretical iterative water-filling, which has been addressed in earlier systems. “Level 2” means a controller such as a DSM Center can jointly coordinate the spectrum levels (for example, on the basis of perceived crosstalk between two or more lines). Level 1 means setting spectrum only on the basis of observations from the same one line. Level 0 means no capability to do DSM. Further information on OSM can be found in various contributions to the T1E1.4 Working Group of ANSI, including Contributions T1E1.4/2003/325, T1E1.4/2004/459 and T1E1.4/2004/460, which are incorporated herein by reference for all purposes. The central coordination required for OSM, however, renders the gains difficult to achieve in a practical system because of the need to control spectra centrally. In embodiments of the present invention, use of the PSDMASK of G.997.1 for the emerging DSM Report of ANSI T1E1.4 and likely for VDSL2 allows the usual discrete-integer water-filling to realize essentially comparable performance as OSM by simply setting a few flat PSD masks in different segments of a DSL modem's used frequencies. The levels of these bands may be increased or decreased until a desired combination of data rates is achieved among users, who still continue to bit-swap or load in the normal manner while observing the particular PSDMASK constraints applicable to each and every tone. Reported margins may correspond to worst-case margins and MAXSNRM is typically applied only to the tone with the smallest margin. Manufacturers may not use best loading or bit-swapping algorithms, leading to variations and interpretations of the imposed PSDMASK. Thus, a preferred band (or “PREFBAND”) bit or indication may be sent to the EM of a modem pair to inform them that discrete-water-fill loading, or an approximation thereto, is desired and that the MAXSNRM parameter should apply to the margins found on all tones (and not just the worst tone). This PREFBAND indication is a portion of this invention.
As noted above, for ADSL1 systems, the MAXNOMPSD value typically is set by the operator. However, using one embodiment of the present invention, one example of which is shown in
In embodiments of the present invention applicable to ADSL1, the controller 510 calculates a margin-related parameter value to be used by the modems (for example, the MAXNOMPSD value), based on operational data collected by the controller (for example data from an MIB 525 or a historical data module 520) for transceiver training that will lead to a suitable margin during SHOWTIME operation. (NOMPSD is chosen by the transmitter and not an MIB-controlled setting; but NOMPSD must be less than MAXNOMPSD and field practice is for this transmitter to set NOMPSD at the same level of any MAXNOMPSD if that value can be implemented. Some MAXNOMPSDs supplied, say −40 dBm/Hz to an RT that can only implement −44 dBm/Hz, may truly be higher than the NOMPSD.) History/library 520 obtains data from the operator MIB 525 and any other available sources of relevant data about the system's performance. The controller 510 supplies the MAXNOMPSD value or other margin-related parameter value to the ATU-C 530. The controller's supplied MAXNOMPSD value may be calculated so that the system realizes the TSNRM/TARSNRM margin value, the MAXSNRM margin value, a margin value in between these two, or any other desired margin target. The controller may elect to test or project the line's performance under a variety of different kinds of noise situations that have occurred, are presently occurring, or may occur, particularly simulating situations where other neighboring lines also have programmed PSDs.
Because the modem 530 often uses MAXNOMPSD as its NOMPSD value, the new MAXNOMPSD valued supplied by the controller 510 is likely to become the NOMPSD value used by the ATU-C modem 530. Even if the controller-supplied MAXNOMPSD value is not selected as the NOMPSD value by the ATU-C, the NOMPSD value cannot be higher than the supplied MAXNOMPSD value and excessive margins will still be avoided during normal SHOWTIME operation.
The controller thereby forces an upper limit on NOMPSD, even though the controller cannot force the NOMPSD value directly. Thus, if −52 is the desired NOMPSD value, the controller sets MAXNOMPSD to −52. Since NOMPSD cannot be higher than MAXNOMPSD, setting MAXNOMPSD to −52 limits the value of NOMPSD, which in turn limits the level of any resulting margin and avoids excessive margin usage. Usually, MAXNOMPSD is the NOMPSD in the very first transceiver training section of ADSL1 training, though this is up to the vendor, and the controller can thus indirectly force the NOMPSD value used by the ATU-C.
As seen in
The ATU-R 540 then computes margin, bits (bi), and gains (gi) after transceiver training and channel analysis using the REFPSD value. The values of gi permitted under ADSL1 are −14.5 dB to +2.5 dB. As seen in step 560 of
In this way, the controller-influenced NOMPSD “seeds” this entire process, allowing the controller 510 to bring the eventual margin and any excess margin into compliance with the MIB-supplied MAXSNRM levels defined in the ADSL1 standard (or any other imposed limits). Finally, adjustments can still be made during SHOWTIME using the gain swapping capabilities of ADSL1.
There is no MIB parameter that directly tells the controller 510 what the NOMPSD value is in ADSL1. The controller may base its recommendation/instruction on a training sequence that has just been completed (where the modem pair goes directly into a re-training procedure) or upon other historical data to which the controller has access.
For upstream power reduction, as shown in the example of
While the upstream and downstream training/power reduction are separate events, one embodiment of the invention drops the upstream PSD under controller control when the previous margin is high. Upstream crosstalk generally is not bad in DSL, but the high powered upstream signal can cause more echo to leak into downstream signals in user modems. By reducing this echo via the lower non-standard upstream PSD, downstream performance can be lifted several dB (perhaps as much as 10 dB) when echo dominates other noises, as it sometimes does when bridged taps are present. Using this embodiment, a modem will outperform current modems on long loops, where most often this local echo at the user modem seems to be the dominant, range-limiting effect.
After the modems enter SHOWTIME, further adjustments to gains can be made using gain swapping.
In ADSL1 and other systems, a simple option according to one embodiment of the present invention is to measure the margin just before SHOWTIME. If the measured margin is higher than a prescribed limit just before the modems enter SHOWTIME (a MAXSNRM of 16 dB, for example), training is recommenced and the modems retrain on a second pass, using the permitted cutback values. Such an implementation might not be controlled by the DSM Center in most situations and instead could be executed in a proprietary mode within the modems themselves, for example by a method according to one embodiment of the present invention in a software module or the like.
Embodiments of the present invention implemented under the ADSL2 standard, examples of which are shown in
Due to the range of available PCB values (0, 1, . . . , 40 dB) and the fact that either ATU-R or ATU-C can command cut back, ADSL2 has a mechanism that standardizes a wider range of power reduction, which can be used to instruct the transmitter to reduce the initial PSD if high margins have been consistently observed previously. The value of the transmitter's PCB may be calculated starting with the MAXNOMPSD parameter that the controller provides. Embodiments of the present invention thus use past history to assist in setting the MAXNOMPSD and/or the PCB/tssi through proprietary levels lower than −60 dBm/Hz PSD's.
As note above, the transmitter can reduce by a PCB if commanded to do so by a DSM Center, operator or other controller. In ADSL2 the transmitters can impose a PCB because the modems must use the larger of the two PCBs requested by the transmitter and receiver. Typically, compliance with an operator-supplied MAXNOMPSD would have occurred and NOMPSD might already be below −40 dBm/Hz before PCB is used early in training. The actual NOMPSD value, transmitted in one of the very first messages sent between the transmitter and receiver in what is known as the G.hs portion of ADSL2 training, occurs before notification of PCB. Then, the downstream transmitter might impose a more substantial PCB for several reasons (for example, when upstream signals look so large that the transmitter wants to make sure that MAXSNRM is observed or because the transmitter has been commanded through a manufacturer-proprietary mode by the operator to use PCB). However, the external MIB for very low PSDs is not in the ADSL2 standard (MAXNOMPSD≧−60 in ADSL2).
Using the present invention, an adjustment of up to 40 dB may be necessary based on previous reported high margins of the line or line history. The transmitter can allow the controller (for example, a DSM Center) to specify that the transmitter wants a PSD lower than −60 dBm/Hz (which is strictly not required in the ADSL2 standard). 20 MAXNOMPSD cannot be lower than −60 dBm/Hz in ADSL2, so a controller (for example, a DSM Center or operator) can force additional reduction through the PCB or the tssi parameters. The tssi parameters are present in ADSL2, but cannot be specified by a controller or operator in ADSL2 (in ADSL2, only the modem manufacturer can set the tssi). (ADSL2+ does allow the tssi to be operator specified via the PSDMASK MIB 25 parameter. In ADSL2+, a controller, operator or DSM Center can force tssi values through the MIB parameter called PSDMASK. The PSDMASK MIB parameter does not exist in ADSL2, and the manufacturer instead can set a tssi value if they want.). To summarize, the PCB is really under control of the transmitter. The controller (for example, DSM Center or operator) can specify PCB indirectly via very low setting for 30 transmit PSD if the ADSL2 modem allows the operator or DSM Center in a proprietary mode to set a PSD below −60 dBm/Hz. (Some ADSL1 DSLAMS have a software upgrade that goes beyond the standard G.992.1 and allows the MAXNOMPSD value to be set by a controller/DSM Center as low as −80 dBm/Hz. In effect the line just looks longer to the ATU-R that does not know this was done, but still works fine. Otherwise, the PCB can be set instead in standard-compliant manner with tssi in ADSL2+ via the PSDMASK that is specified in ADSL2+ MIB).
In the upstream direction only, the PCB sent by the receiver (ATU-C) to the transmitter can also be requested to cause the upstream received power to be less than a value known as MAXRXPWR that can be set by the operator or the controller (for example, a DSM Center) in ADSL2. Thus, by using MAXRXPWR, a controller can cause the PCB to implement via a DSM Center command or the like. However, downstream requires use of proprietary functions to force less than −60 dBm/Hz (either with PCB or tssi). The present invention includes either setting the level with tssi, or implementing a DSM-smart transmitter that bypasses the need for controller commands and internally sets the PSD level with PCB, or both.
In the example of
The controller 610 may consult a margin performance history 620 (such as a library, database, memory or computer module), which can obtain its information from any appropriate source, for example a system estimation or the MIB 625, which in turn obtains its data from the ATU-C 630, one or more management entities 644 or from any other source, as will be appreciated by those skilled in the art. Using collected operational data and possibly one or more modem operational parameters, the controller 610 can analyze the operational data and then generate one or more margin-related parameter values and send the modified margin-related parameter value(s) to the modem pair for implementation. The margin-related parameter (here, for example, the MAXNOMPSD value sent to the ATU-C 630) is chosen and calculated to result in an appropriate margin level after any pre-operation transceiver training, etc. to assist the modem in meeting one or more margin targets.
The ATU-C 630 sends the staffing NOMPSD value to the ATU-R 640 during the handshake phase of the training, per § 8.13.2 of the ADSL2 standard. During the channel discovery phase (e.g. step 650 of
During transceiver training (step 655 of
In ADSL2, the same steady-state permitted gain values of −14.5 dB to +2.5 dB found in ADSL1 are nominally used. However, in ADSL2 the reinterpretation of any synchronization symbol power level to be at the same level as data symbols allows this full −14.5 dB to +2.5 dB range of gains to be effected, whereas ADSL1 modems typically are limited to within +2.5 dB or −2.5 dB of the initial power level of −40, −42, . . . or −52 offset from the initial training gains gi level during swapping. The ADSL2 EXTGI parameter allows the gains to be increased above 2.5 dB by up to +18.0 dB in addition to the levels nominally used in ADSL2 swapping. EXTGI is determined and/or set by the DSLAM manufacturer outside the influence of any operator, controller and/or dynamic spectrum manager and is communicated to the receiving modem during initialization. A high value of EXTGI can confuse various PSD levels, since neither the MAXNOMPSD nor the PSDMASK (ADSL2+) should be exceeded even when this EXTGI is sufficiently large. Some manufacturers may ignore the mask and implement the mask-ignoring EXTGI because of the confused intentions specified by a large EXTGI value and lowered masks (although the ADSL2 standard does not permit this).
Some current modems and/or systems regularly fail to use correct settings and the MAXSNRM limit often may not be implemented correctly in ADSL2 modems. Thus, by providing a controller-defined MAXNOMPSD, the transmitter ATU-C side can impose a PCB (and/or tssi, in ADSL2) value during an initialization message conveying the downstream PCB value, effectively forcing the margin to be reduced by an amount equal to the proposed downstream PCB (and based on past history of margin observation). In particular, in one or more embodiments of the present invention, the controller 610 can supply a MAXNOMPSD level to the ATU-C 630 that is intentionally below −60 dBm/Hz to force lower margins and get them closer to the commanded MAXSNRM or to observe the commanded MAXSNRM (perhaps based on a history of margin activity that a single training of the line would not reveal to the receiver modem's PCB-determining algorithm).
In addition, when the PCB values are exchanged, the exact level of power reduction necessary to meet MAXSNRM may not be known, meaning that the PCB values can then be too conservative. Thus, again in ADSL2, the controller 610 might need to observe and/or consult the margin history 620 and impose a lower PSD on the line than the MAXNOMPSD of −52 dBm/Hz for ADSL1 or −60 dBm/Hz for ADSL2. This would then be observed by the modems through the PCB to the REFPSD=NOMPSD−PCB<MAXNOMPSD used. Furthermore, ADSL2 and the complimentary G.997.1 standard allow a DSL system operator or controller to impose a MAXNOMPSD parameter that limits the REFPSD level to as low as −60 dBm/Hz or as high as −38 dBm/Hz (depending on the applicable annex, some of which may only allow −40 dBm/Hz).
In some cases, the MAXNOMPSD (effectively the NOMPSD) may be set as high as −34 dBm/Hz (which is not standards compliant). The controller can instruct a DSLAM to go up in these cases on very long lines where the current −40 dBm/Hz would have caused only 12 or 13 dBm or so of transmit power to be used (the long lines with low margins and low data rates are the only ones that really need full power). The actual PSD lower than this −60 dBm/Hz needs to be specified through a PSDMASK parameter that is only observed as an MB-control parameter in ADSL2+. However, the controller may notify a collaborating ATU-C or ATU-R to alert that entity to use a PCB (or tssi) value that further reduces the −60 dBm/Hz even in ADSL2 in a standard-compliant manner. The MAXNOMPSD parameter is conveyed to both sides of the DSL line before ADSL training initiates in a procedure known as “handshake” (per ITU standard G.994.1). The PSDMASK parameter is only ME3 specified in ADSL2 (it is conveyed in ADSL2, but at the transmitter's discretion and not controlled or specified by the operator), but can be conveyed in other ways (for instance through file transfer programs (“ftp”) or simple email messages over the internet to an agreed IP address between the controller and the ATU-C or ATU-R).
Those skilled in the art will note that the ADSL2+ standard has all of the ADSL2 capabilities specified above for up to double the spectrum or double the number of transmitted DMT tones used. Thus, power-reduction comments and capabilities discussed in connection with ADSL2 systems apply to ADSL2+ systems as well. In addition, some embodiments of the present invention pertaining to ADSL2+ use a concept known as a spectrum toolbox that allows an operator and/or controller to impose a potentially non-flat initial PSDMASK quantity that specifies multiple flat spectrum regions with a series of break frequencies and power levels. The PSDMASK may be as low as −96 dBm/Hz and as high as −32 dBm/Hz. This capability has sometimes been ignored, misunderstood or undone by transmission systems, to the detriment of such systems. Using past history of a line, a controller may use some of the ADSL2+ capabilities to implement embodiments of the present invention.
Up to 32 breakpoints (about 8 bands) are allowed in ADSL2+, but the mechanism for transfer of them in the G.994.1 initialization actually allows ADSL2+ a PSDMASK level specification for all 512 downstream and all 64 upstream tones if desired. Thus a controller such as a DSM Center or operator, by imposing a PSDMASK, can weight up or down various bands staffing with the beginning of training and continuing through all further training and SHOWTIME bit/gain-swapping. PCB can still be used, but becomes more of a receiver mechanism for implementing MAXSNRM, since the PSDMASK essentially replaces MAXNOMPSD of ADSL2 (although that parameter still exists and a PSDMASK cannot exceed it). The equivalent of PSDMASK also is allowed upstream under G.992.5, except that it must be implemented by direct specification of the tssi parameters upstream (while downstream allows either direct specification of tssi or the easier direct specification of the PSDMASK). The PREFBAND bit of DSM Report is in addition to G.992.5 and addresses the additional ambiguity of the PSDMASK when observing MAXSNRM—that is, margin calculation in G.992.5 with bitcaps (which are at the limit, for example 15 bits or less, but some finite value) is typically defined as the “worst margin over all tones.” Thus, the loading algorithm could increase the margin in a preferred (that is, good or used) frequency band to a very high level, while limiting margin to a smaller value in a less preferred band with lower PSD. Since the worst margin then occurs in the less preferred band, it is reported and essentially then defeats the use of MAXSNRM principle. If instead the PREFBAND is on, that means all tones' margins must be less than MAXSNRM not just the worst. Thus, the receiver cannot confuse the intent of the PSDMASK as being used for band preference or for some other reason. The imposition of the PSDMASK is then indicated by the operator to the modems with PREFBAND “on.” The “on” indication essentially prevents vendor proprietary loading methods from defeating the intent of the preferential band treatment intended by PSDMASK imposition with PREFBAND on.
For instance, downstream, the ATU-R loading algorithm could see that the margin is 7 dB on one tone somewhere in the band and all the others are 30 dB or more. Because this is the worst margin, the modem then claims compliance with the margin target MAXSNRM. However, PSDMASK is set so that no margin on any tone will exceed MAXSNRM. PREFBAND “on” means the modem manufacturer must implement that overall compliance and cannot show 7 dB just on one tone and 30 dB everywhere else—it must observe MAXSNRM on all tones with PREFBAND “on.”
Normally, low levels in PSDMASK are used to specify bands that should be avoided and/or only lightly used. However, an operator/DSM-center-specified flat low PSDMASK<60 dBm/Hz forces the NOMPSD to this specified level (which can be as low as 96 dBm/Hz) in the invention, thus forcing via the low initial NOMPSD level a consequently also low margin (even before the modems might have used PCB to do the same). This very low PSD is invoked or forced as specified by the controller, operator or DSM Center, anticipating that some manufacturers' modems may do a poor job of margin and spectrum management, even if standards forced better management. Along with the NMS communication available, a controller may communicate the PSDMASK as the margin-related parameter value to the modems via the Internet (email and/or ftp communication, for example). Since the PSDMASK did not come to the modems via the element management system, the modems would then need to make adjustments with PCB and/or gi (within the (−14.5 dB) to (EXTGI+2.5) limitation) to the REFPSD value.
Thus, as an example for a DSL line that allows EXTGI of 18 dB and a lowest MAXNOMPSD of −60 dBm/Hz as required in the standards: the ATU-R could adjust the PSD to −72.5 dBm/Hz in a band initialized at −58 dBm/Hz by setting the gi to −14.5 dB in that band. That same ATU-R could also in another band set a PSD of −40 dBm/Hz by setting gi=+18 dB in that other band. The resultant band preference would be then 32.5 dB (the difference between the two levels). Note that this is done without directly using the PSDMASK in the element management system MIB, but the receiver that implements loading would have been told the PSDMASK or degree of band preference over the internet and then would know to use the full gi range here to accomplish the range even though no PSDMASK initial-PSD setting was allowed. Thus an intelligent ATU-R essentially forces a standard-compliant ADSL2 ATU-C modem (where PSDMASK is not used) to implement band preference. This would use all the gi range available, so of course the tssi, if available, is a better implementation. However, tssi might not always be available as in ADSL2. On the other hand, if PSDMASK is working in the MIB of an ADSL2+ modem, then this procedure would not be needed and tssi could instead be used.
Some manufacturers allow external specification of MAXNOMPSD down to −80 dBm/Hz in their new ADSL1 and ADSL2 software, recognizing this is a (slightly) nonstandard mode of operation but one that does not truly cause any harm other than the fact that the operator must then know to adjust certain parameters like Hlog and attenuation that were computed based on −52 dBm/Hz (or −60 dBm/Hz).
There is a reference noise upstream PSD in VDSL (referred to herein as REFNOISE) that can be used to force PSDs to certain settings. In some embodiments of the present invention, the controller works backwards from an initial REFNOISE value to an implied PSDMASK as the modified margin-related parameter value. Thus, with some translations and unconventional use of the ref-noise PSD, the present invention can be used in connection with VDSL system, and can capture the same effects as in the ADSLs.
“Band preference” is important to achieve gains in OSM and can be defined as emphasis of a band in uncoordinated loading that continues the usual bit-swapping and gain-swapping procedures that are necessary in practical systems without loss in performance. A dynamic spectrum manager cannot be expected to react and change bit distributions fast enough and certainly would be slower than the modems' reactions themselves, which is one of the reasons that OSM proponents agree that water-filling or approximations done by modems in distributed fashion (sometimes referred to as “iterative water-filling”) are good enough. Band preference essentially tells the receiving modem to observe a PSDMASK within a band specified as the margin-related parameter value by the PSDMASK or by the “tss” parameter of ADSL2+ G.992.5's “spectral toolbox” to “load with preference,” allowing a priority to some bands in water-filling in general and preventing loading to levels that might interfere with other DSLs.
The theoretical water-filling procedure solves the equations:
for non-negative energies En on each of the tones (NSC is the maximum number of tones). The gap Γ is a constant determined by code choices and desired margins at a given bit error rate in DSLs. The channel attenuation on each frequency is specified by |Hn|2 and the noise energy on each tone is specified by σn 2, both of which are measured (or their ratio measured directly) during training and updated during SHOWTIME operation. This procedure is viewed as running continuously in time with updates at periodic or on-channel-change intervals.
This theoretical water-filling procedure is well-known in DSL and can be approximated in a number of ways including various greedy algorithms (also called Levin-Campello procedures) for discrete integer bit restrictions where successive bits are loaded in the least energy-consumptive bit positions on all the tones until the desired max bit rate limit has been attained with no more than a maximum specified margin (often known as MAXSNRM in various DSL standards) and no less than a minimum or target margin (often known as TARSNRM or TSNRM in various DSL standards). A frequency-dependent bit-cap and a frequency-dependent TSNRM[n] to augment the existing systems are when communicated via ftp and/or email to the receiving modem that is implementing the loading algorithm. These can also be useful if FEC cannot be adaptive and the system is forced to provide a frequency-dependent protection against an intermittent/impulse noise that does not occur often, but is large when it does occur and the frequency range it hits is known.
Loading algorithms compute the number of bits b[n] for each tone and the gi “gain” (gn) factor for each tone. There are many loading-algorithm variants, which are well known to those skilled in the art. The modem vendor can attempt at any specified data rate (or maximum data rate if rate adaptive) to minimize approximately the amount of power required at the given MAXSNRM. If the margin is less than MAXSNRM, but the spectrum produced and reported appears to be deviant, a controller such as a DSM Center can suggest a PSD mask to be observed in bit-swapping and loading in the invention.
One procedure for loading is provided here for use with embodiments of the present invention. Loading essentially depends on two vector quantities: a vector of incremental normalized energies, whose components are Δ(b); and a vector of channel-referenced noises or channel-normalized mean squared errors (MSEs), νn. The latter quantity νn can be computed as
where Wn is the frequency domain equalizer (FEQ) coefficient on tone n if an FEQ is used. The energy to transmit one more bit on tone n when tone n is already carrying bn bits is
ΔE n(b n+1)=Δ(b n+1)·νn Equation (3)
where the function Δ(b) does not depend on tone index n, but does depend on the ADSL constellations and the target margin TSNRM. The function Δ(b) defines the incremental (additional) energy required to transmit the bth bit on any channel with νn=1 with respect to the (b−1)th bit. Thus, by storing this function Δ(b) which requires up to BCAP locations (never more than 15 bits in ADSL, so Δ(16)=∞ and Δ(0)=0), and by computing/updating and storing the NSC channel-dependent quantities νn n=1, . . . , NSC, the extra energy to transmit the additional energy on any channel can be computed through the product of the two functions as in Equation (3).
After computing Equation (3), the resultant total energy on the tone needs to be compared with any applicable MAXNOMPSD or PSDMASK constraints, and if this bound is exceeded by more than 2.5 dB (or some other precision-based number with which the designer is comfortable less than 2.5 dB), then ΔEn(bn+1)=∞ (that is, the incremental energy is reset to some maximum number that can be represented in the processor implementing loading). Such PSDMASK constraints may be often imposed in ADSL systems. Storing of such masks typically requires another 1 (just MAXNOMPSD) to roughly 20 locations (PSDMASK levels for various tones in ADSL2+). Table 1 of
ε=100.95+TSNRM−CODGAIN Equation (4)
where CODGAIN is
dB for use of only FEC and represents about 3.8 dB nominally for coding gain plus the extra 6% of parity bits (so loading is referenced with respect to a system that has total data rate as reference and this reference is treated as if it had no parity nor code).
The bave is the average (estimated) number of bits per tone that can be computed from an estimate of the total line rate by dividing the total number of bits per symbol (BMAX) by the number of tones, and then multiplying this by the overhead percentage and then the nominal 3 dB/bit cost. Usually this CODGAIN is about 5 dB. This extra gain above 3.8 dB is needed because a line-bit-rate is being loaded by the algorithm described here. The parity-overhead quantity (R/N)≦0.08 for this rule to work. The rule becomes optimistic if more parity is being used and the CODGAIN should not exceed 5 dB in line-bit-rate loading. The limit of 5 dB may reduce the computed line-bit-rate-bit-total BMAX (that is, the real coding gain might be yet higher than 8 dB but not as high as the formula indicates), but if a large parity fraction is being used, the line is dominated by impulse or intermittent noise and a pessimistic coding gain is prudent.
When chronic lines use larger fractions of parity, the CODGAIN is usually higher but stationary noise does not dominate performance, and thus underestimating the coding gain is not a serious error on chronic lines.
In ADSL1, the tones are reordered for encoder progression from tones with the lowest number of bits to the highest number of bits. ADSL2 instead allows the receiver to reorder the tones for transmitter encoder progression according to the receiver's desired and specified tone reordering. This tone reordering is communicated to the transmitter during training. In ADSL2 and ADSL2+, that reordering may be used to simplify loading search algorithms, but embodiments of the present invention assume it has been implemented in the relevant standardized manner and does not address the exact transmitter/receiver ordering used. The reference loading algorithm provided here is for whatever ordering was specified.
Follows is a reference training loading algorithm example:
Follows is a reference SHOWTIME loading algorithm example:
At the end of either procedure, the total energy on any tone is computed by
This energy level can be converted into a gain level gn, as will be appreciated by those skilled in the art.
Trellis coding imposes slightly more complexity on loading but follows the same basic principle. Loading for the DMT transmission system with trellis coding forms subchannel groups of two tones each. The two tones within a group are successive tones in whatever ordering has been used. There is always an even number of used tones, and thus an integer number of groups, when trellis coding is used in ADSL. The incremental energy tables then become the incremental energy for adding a bit with trellis coding to a group (instead of just to a tone) of two tones. Up to 29 bits may be loaded in a group (15 bits for first tone plus 15 bits for 2nd tone minus one extra bit needed in trellis coding) when the BCAP=15 for all tones.
Within a group of two tones, it can be assumed without loss of generality that νn+1>νn (otherwise just re-index within the loading algorithm for calculations and undo re-index when exiting the loading algorithm). The incremental energy to add a bit to a group is then always the smallest energy for adding that bit within the two tones, knowing that when starting in a group with 0 bits, the first information bit added is actually two bits (one extra first bit for the overhead of one bit/group in trellis coding) added on tone n. Every subsequent added bit costs just one incremental energy unit instead of the two incremental energy units for the first bit. The loading tables are those shown in Table 2 of
Thus the loading algorithm in investigating the group of tones (n n+1) will for each bit after the first added on tone n, potentially add the bit to the individual tone with
For deleting a bit, the 4D trellis loading algorithm investigates instead
If only trellis coding is used, then the CODGAIN in Equation (4) should be 4.2+1.5=5.7 dB. If both trellis and FEC are used, then the CODGAIN should be
which can be estimated to be about 8 dB. Again, (R/N)≦0.08 for this rule to work. The rule becomes optimistic if more parity is being used and the CODGAIN should not exceed 8 dB in line-bit-rate loading. The limit of 8 dB may reduce the computed line-bit-rate-bit-total BMAX, but if large parity fraction is being used, the line is dominated by impulse or intermittent noise and a pessimistic coding gain is prudent.
The implementation of the loading algorithm can lead to a “ragged” or saw-tooth like energy characteristic because of the “jumps” in energy for having only integer numbers of bits per tone. Thus, one reason for adjusting gain is to “equalize” the margin on all tones. Usually this is a small effect but can provide slightly higher modem/line margin—it need not be implemented and often is not implemented by modem manufacturers. After a bit distribution is set, some tones may have slightly higher margin than others (the reported margin is the worst over all tones). In fact the tone to which a next bit would have been added had there been one more bit to load has the highest margin, the next on a different tone after that, the next highest margin, and so on. Gains on these tones with margins higher than the last tone to receive a bit in loading could all transmit slightly lower energy and the tone with the last loaded bit more (as long as PSD mask not violated).
ADSL1 and ADSL2 both allow the gain to be specified within the range of [−14.5, +2.5+EXTGI] dB during training (where EXTGI=0 always for ADSL1). ADSL2 allows this same range during SHOWTIME operation and the exact gn value is sent through the overhead channel. ADSL1 restricts the range during SHOWTIME to −2, −1, 1, 2, or 3 dB changes relative to the value last established during training or on a previous gain swap, specifically the exact precision value of the gain after a gain swap of
where round means set to the closest integer value. Cascaded gain swaps should not cause the range [−14.5, +2.5+EXTGI] to be violated.
Modem vendors should know that ADSL1 modems have a synch symbol that is not reduced in power every 17 ms. Thus, if the rest of the signal is reduced in power by any loading procedure (such as, in particular, gain swapping), then intersymbol interference (ISI) from the ADSL1 synch symbol can appear relatively large and dominate all other noises. This ISI can be cancelled in many ways, including, since the synch symbol is known, effectively reconstructing the ISI and removing it. Another solution is changing the time domain equalization settings as the gap between synch symbol energy and normal symbol energy increases. The ADSL1 standard recommends but does not mandate that SHOWTIME gain swaps maintain all symbol energy with +/−2.5 dB of the fixed synch symbol power spectral density levels.
For ADSL1, the basic loading step can be followed by a margin-equalizing step. This margin-equalizing step occurs after a data rate has been set (either attaining the desired rate in fixed-rate ADSL or settling on a maximum rate in rate-adaptive ADSL).
The algorithm referenced here can be used for ADSL1 margin-equalization during SHOWTIME (ADSL1 gain swapping) and assumes for SHOWTIME gain swapping that gains during training have already been set such that the MAXSNRM is not exceeded (if MAXSNRM was exceeded during initial training, then gain swapping is not necessary). For fixed-rate loading, the energy used will be less than the total energy allowed (or the modem will retrain or perhaps operate at <TSNRM, in which case this procedure can and should be used, resetting TSNRM to the actual lower SNRM). Computation of the margin for each tone is well known to those skilled in the art. The steps are:
Any gain swaps are then implemented. By the end of this procedure, up to 3 dB will have been added to those tones that had lowest margins. The bit distribution will not have changed, but the margins may have increased by 1, 2, or 3 dB on some tones. The new smallest margin will be no less than that previous to execution of the procedure and typically 1 dB or so better.
The same procedure as the ADSL1 SHOWTIME is followed for ADSL1 margin-equalization during initialization (and ADSL2 gain swapping for training or SHOWTIME), except that the designer can use a smaller increment than 1 dB, for example 0.5 dB, so that the algorithm can run up to 5 passes (instead of 3) with each pass possibly providing another 0.5 dB on some increasingly smaller subset of tones. Again if MAXSNRM has been exceeded (ADSL1 only) or attained (ADSL1 or ADSL2), then gain swapping is not necessary.
For all swapping methods, of course, as the channel noise (MSE) changes with time, first bit-swapping can be executed and then the gain swapping again. Even if no bit-swap is necessary, a gain swap may be necessary if MSE has changed.
The above-discussed algorithms are easily modified for BCAP[n] and TSNRM[n]. For a non-uniform BCAP[n]≦15, then Δ(bn)=∞ for bn>BCAP[n], which is tested before multiplying Δ(bn) by νn to get ΔEn(bn). With trellis coding, BCAP[n] will apply to information bits so that as in Table 2 of
For non-uniform TSNRM[n], it is simpler (less memory) to alter each νn, rather than alter Δ(b), according to
where TSNRM is the single (uniform) margin specified (usually 6 dB). Both BCAP[n] and TSNRM[n] may be used for various improvements on specific lines.
In greedy algorithms, tones that have already been loading to a maximum bit cap have infinite (large) cost to add additional bits, thus preventing bits/tone in excess of the bit-cap. The present invention recognizes that tones for which the addition of a bit would cause the PSDMASK bound specified to be exceeded should also have infinite (large) cost in those positions, which may or may not be implemented by various manufacturers. Changes in channel and or noise are monitored and the algorithms are run continuously, allowing the DMT transmission facility to move bits so that good energy use and margin are maintained. The infinite cost associated with exceeding an imposed spectral mask is maintained in SHOWTIME operation so that bits do not reallocate to a PSDMASK-limited band even if that band would be more attractive than other bands in theoretical water-filling.
The PSDMASK's imposition of essentially an infinite cost to adding bits on a particular tone when the existing energy of that tone is already at or near the mask level is used in the band preference. Essentially, it is too costly to add a bit in an un-preferred band because of the PSDMASK constraint, thus biasing or forcing the discrete water-filling algorithm (that is, the greedy algorithm) to load that same bit in a preferred band where the PSDMASK may be higher and thus encourage loading of more bits. The PSDMASK may have thus been set well below the allowed MAXNOMPSD mask in some bands to indicate preference to the use of other bands, presumably because the controller and/or dynamic spectrum manager (again, for example, an SMC or DSM Center or Manager) has determined such band preference is valuable to the lines. A central control of the bit distribution is likely impractical because of the response speed required to change the bit distribution as needed or as appropriate for time-varying channel effects (like crosstalk changes, etc.). Band preference is instead specified at time of initialization by the controller and/or dynamic spectrum manager, presumably through a considered choice of the PSDMASK levels (or alternatively possibly through tssn levels) that are specified in ADSL2+ and currently being proposed for VDSL2.
The energy on a particular tone, En, is determined by 3 components as follows:
E n =E 0,n ·g n 2 ·tss n 2 Equation (9)
where E0,n is the REFPSD level. For instance, an ADSL modem with no power back off and no use of PSDMASK would have an E0,n that corresponds to −40 dBm/Hz (or some other value determined in the various annexes of standards or designated by as NOMPSD by a controller according to an embodiment of the present invention) that would be known to both transmitter and receiver. The quantity gn 2 specifies a receiver-computed “gi” gain that is usually between −14.5 dB and +2.5 dB for ADSL standards and, in theory, could be any non-negative (linear) value. This “gain” is passed to the transmitter through a reverse control channel in DMT DSL either at the exchange of initialization or during “bit-swapping” in live operation of the modem. The tssn 2 parameter is fixed for any use of the modem by the MIB and can be between 0 and 1. With theoretical water-filling, the tss is almost useless, since the gain parameter could undo any tss effect and set the energy levels to the desired water-filling levels (if gains gn were not upper bounded). Of course, a tss=0 value would prevent use of the tone and could not be inverted. In practice the upper bounding of the possible gain choices by 2.5 dB or by EXTGI allows the tss to impact the loading algorithm's limits and is thus a useful tool. In particular an upper limit of gain at +2.5 dB prevents significant inversion (if this limit were raised by EXTGI, then more inversion is possible and a value of EXTGI=18.0 dB could be, perhaps erroneously, used to reintroduce the band-preference inversion of theoretical water-filling). The unmodified water-filling procedure would restore a band by a positive value of gains when tss is low. The situation of the E0+2.5 dB being the maximum in Equation (1), above, corresponds directly to an infinite (large in finite precision) cost associated with adding an additional bit to that tone in discrete loading. This nonlinearity of discrete loading is important to band preference.
In a system where PSDMASK values have been set intentionally lower in an otherwise good band, the infinite cost associated with loading more bits beyond those levels that attain the mask in that band forces the loading algorithm to instead place bits into other available transmission bands that have not yet reached the PSDMASK PSD limit, essentially then preferring or favoring those other bands. This also can be done essentially with the non-standard BCAP[n] concept (the variable bit cap with frequency). For instance, in certain ADSL CO/RT mix situations and VDSL upstream examples, theoretical water-filling is ineffective because it attempts to continue to load into the lower frequency band that looks more attractive (but then is limited by the crosstalk created into the second user on the longer line). For those same situations, if the receiver also knows the PSDMASK setting, discrete water-filling would sense the infinite cost of exceeding the PSDMASK if it had been set at the appropriately low level to avoid crosstalk into the longer line (or if bit-caps were held at a certain number of maximum bits less than the usual 15). Thus, the discrete water-filling would then begin adding bits to the second higher-frequency band on the shorter line in both examples and get the same results as OSM. Significant improvements also may be realized if the dynamic spectrum manager knows that particular lines are mutual interferers (for example, using one of the estimation methodologies of the present invention described above).
In some embodiments of the present invention, PREFBAND is a 1-bit unsigned integer for which 1 specifies that cost of loading bits above the PSDMASK is to be infinite (or effectively prohibited) and that the MAXSNRM should be applied to all tones and not just the worst-margin tone. It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that this embodiment of the present invention also could be used effectively in VDSL2. The determination of the PSDMASK levels that are imposed is the domain of a controller, such a DSM Center. The controller may need to know the Hlog and noise power spectrum density centrally as well as the DSM report's Xlog gains to be able to centrally determine good PSDMASK levels to impose in band preference. One method for such determination that avoids the high computation and convergence problems of OSM is to attempt a few gross spectrum levels and band edge frequencies in a simulated iterative discrete water-filling of all the channels using the Hlog, Xlog, and noise power spectral densities to see which settings yield acceptable line performance improvement.
OSM algorithms, and to some lesser degree band preference, require at least knowledge of the crosstalk transfer functions between interfering lines. In an ADSL2 system or in any system (email/ftp) where the all the pertinent binder insertion losses and crosstalk insertion loss transfer functions are available to or can be computed by the controller, then a central algorithm can determine the levels to be used in band preference. These levels are then communicated to the ATU-C and/or ATU-R and implemented via the PSDMASKs and/or the band-preference bit.
Measures such as forward error correction and a bit error rate in DSL systems are intended to help DSL service to provide reliably high data rates to DSL customers. While both “reliability” (defined in some instances as fewer retrainings, reduced chance of throughput decrease due to high code violation (CV) counts, etc.) and “high data rates” are important, there has been no clear way of trading the two, and service providers often have ended up with mixtures of unreliable lines (that is, for example, frequent retraining, high CV counts) and under-achieving lines (low data rates). Operators also have found that these reliability and service/performance problems contribute to repair needs and costs (for example, truck rolls) and customer satisfaction and loyalty, including customer turnover rates. Embodiments of the present invention include methods and techniques for achieving desired data rates with minimum margin or otherwise maximizing desired data rates while maintaining one or more minimum reliability conditions. That is, using embodiments of the present invention, where the maximum data rate can be maintained (for good lines), adaptive power/margin controls can be used to optimize performance. Where the maximum data rate cannot be achieved (for poor lines), adaptive data rate controls can be implemented to provide the best data rate possible that complies with one or more performance related parameters and/or targets (for example, CV count, retrainings, etc.).
In current systems and standards, the data rate is selected by the modem during training (or sometimes also in SHOWTIME in ADSL2) when the dynamic rate adaptation is “on”. This selected data rate cannot exceed the maximum rate for which the customer pays, and so is fixed at this maximum rate on good lines. For poor lines, the rate is less than the maximum and is selected for a given margin level (for example, 6 dB margin) upon training. In other words, the adaptive data rate control applies only when a line cannot achieve the max rate within the customer's service plan (for example, 1.5˜3 Mbps).
When the maximum data rate can be reliably achieved with an appropriate margin, there is no need to control the data rate adaptively (the maximum rate is merely chosen), and controlling margin to avoid excessive levels (while maintaining the maximum rate) is instead the issue. In such cases, the margin target for the power back-off might need to be decided adaptively for each line such that a desired performance parameter and/or target (for example, retraining/CV criteria) can be met for the line, while minimizing the interference to other lines. For example, for a line that does not see any fluctuation of noise power, a margin target of 6 dB might be enough. But for a line that sees up to 10 dB of noise power fluctuation, a proper margin to choose might be 16 dB. Until now, however, a fixed margin target has been used at the time of training, and only the noise power at the time of training has been used as the basis for choosing power back-off (that is, the history or distribution of noise power has not been considered).
Similar problems exist for poor lines under current practices. When the maximum data rate cannot be reliably achieved with an appropriate margin, there is no need to control the power adaptively (just choose the maximum power). There, controlling data rates to avoid excessive rates (while maintaining the margin levels) is instead the issue. For examples, for a line that does not see any fluctuation of noise power, a data rate of 2.0 Mbps might be appropriate to meet the desired retraining/CV or other performance-related criteria. But for a line that frequently sees a larger noise power, a data rate of 1.6 Mbps might be appropriate instead. Until now, however, a fixed margin target has been used at the time of training, and only the noise power at the time of training has been input for choosing data rate (that is, the history or distribution of noise power has not been considered). In the following examples of embodiments of the present invention, methods and techniques taking advantage of history and/or distribution are described.
For an ADSL line of interest, various operational data can be collected periodically or aperiodically. This data may include current margin, current data rate, current maximum attainable data rate, FEC correction counts, CV counts, retrain counts, channel transfer functions and noise spectra. Moreover, using collected operational data, the probability distributions of margin, maximum attainable data rate, FEC correction counts, CV counts, retrain counts, etc. can be estimated as a function of the data rate. The channel transfer function and noise spectrum might not be immediately available to a controller if the operational data is collected only from ATU-C side of ADSL1 system, but at least some of the useful data can be estimated in such situations. Techniques for acquiring such estimations can be found in U.S. Ser. No. 10/817,128, filed Apr. 2, 2004, and incorporated by reference above.
One example of a margin distribution plot is shown in
Margin is related closely to CV count, retraining rates, maximum data rates and other related performance parameters. For example, high CV counts and/or retraining rates may be related statistically to the number of truck rolls needed for a given DSL line. Similarly, customer satisfaction (for example, as measured by the number of customers who drop a given operator's service) may likewise be related statistically to the CV count and/or retraining rates. Therefore, after finding the distribution(s) of one or more performance parameters as a function of data rate, the probability of line outage (retraining of the line) and probability of the count of CV exceeding a threshold as a function of data rate can also then be calculated. If performance thresholds/targets are of particular importance to an operator or other party, the present invention allows that party to control data rate and/or power/margin usage adaptively to meet one or more of these targets.
The maximum power back-off (minimum margin) or maximum data rate then can be chosen while simultaneously satisfying the reliability criteria (for example, the number of retrainings and CV count exceeding a specified threshold).
For instance, multiple thresholds can be used for the number of retrainings and CV counts, and the criteria can be as follows:
A method 1100 according to one embodiment of the present invention is shown in
As reflected in
Based on the margin distribution, the maximum power back-off or the maximum data rate can be chosen such that all three margin criteria are satisfied for the DSL line of interest. It is also possible to combine the six retraining and CV criteria with the three margin criteria such that the risk related to the estimation error can be reduced.
Embodiments of the present invention also can be applied analogously to situations in which a line experiences two distinct states with long stay periods in both states. In such cases, two sets of margin distribution criteria can be formed, and the appropriate set of criteria can be used upon the detection of the current state. Obviously, the invention can be further extended to lines with three or more states.
Generally, embodiments of the present invention employ various processes involving data stored in or transferred through one or more modems and/or computer systems. Embodiments of the present invention also relate to a hardware device or other apparatus for performing these operations. This apparatus may be specially constructed for the required purposes, or it may be a general-purpose computer selectively activated or reconfigured by a computer program and/or data structure stored in the computer. The processes presented herein are not inherently related to any particular computer or other apparatus. In particular, various general-purpose machines may be used with programs written in accordance with the teachings herein, or it may be more convenient to construct a more specialized apparatus to perform the required method steps. A particular structure for a variety of these machines will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art based on the description given below.
Embodiments of the present invention as described above employ various process steps involving data stored in computer systems. These steps are those requiring physical manipulation of physical quantities. Usually, though not necessarily, these quantities take the form of electrical or magnetic signals capable of being stored, transferred, combined, compared and otherwise manipulated. It is sometimes convenient, principally for reasons of common usage, to refer to these signals as bits, bitstreams, data signals, instruction signals, values, elements, variables, characters, data structures or the like. It should be remembered, however, that all of these and similar terms are to be associated with the appropriate physical quantities and are merely convenient labels applied to these quantities.
Further, the manipulations performed are often referred to in terms such as identifying, fitting or comparing. In any of the operations described herein that form part of the present invention these operations are machine operations. Useful machines for performing the operations of embodiments of the present invention include general purpose digital computers, processors, modems or other similar devices. In all cases, there should be borne in mind the distinction between the method of operations in operating a computer and the method of computation itself. Embodiments of the present invention relate to method steps for operating a computer in processing electrical or other physical signals to generate other desired physical signals.
In addition, embodiments of the present invention further relate to computer readable media that include program instructions for performing various computer-implemented operations. The media and program instructions may be those specially designed and constructed for the purposes of the present invention, or they may be of the kind well known and available to those having skill in the computer software arts. Examples of computer-readable media include, but are not limited to, magnetic media such as hard disks, floppy disks, and magnetic tape; optical media such as CD-ROM disks; magneto-optical media such as floptical disks; and hardware devices that are specially configured to store and perform program instructions, such as read-only memory devices (ROM) and random access memory (RAM). Examples of program instructions include both machine code, such as produced by a compiler, and files containing higher level code that may be executed by the computer using an interpreter.
CPU 802 also is coupled to an interface 810 that includes one or more input/output devices such as such as video monitors, track balls, mice, keyboards, microphones, touch-sensitive displays, transducer card readers, magnetic or paper tape readers, tablets, styluses, voice or handwriting recognizers, or other well-known input devices such as, of course, other computers. Finally, CPU 802 optionally may be coupled to a computer or telecommunications network using a network connection as shown generally at 812. Connection 812 may be used to communicate with the DSL system and/or modems of interest. In some cases, the computer system 800 may have a proprietary, dedicated and/or otherwise specific connection with the DSL system, perhaps through an operator's facilities (for example, a CO) or in some other suitable manner (for example, connecting to the NMS of a given DSL system). With such connections, it is contemplated that the CPU might receive information from the network and/or DSL system, or might output information to the network and/or DSL system in the course of performing the above-described method steps. The above-described devices and materials will be familiar to those of skill in the computer hardware and software arts. The hardware elements described above may define multiple software modules for performing the operations of this invention. For example, instructions for running a margin monitoring and control controller may be stored on mass storage device 808 (which may be or include a CD-ROM) and executed on CPU 802 in conjunction with primary memory 806 and a suitable computer program product in use on system 800. In a preferred embodiment, the controller is divided into software submodules.
The many features and advantages of the present invention are apparent from the written description, and the appended claims are intended to cover all such features and advantages of the invention. Further, since numerous modifications and changes will readily occur to those skilled in the art, the present invention is not limited to the exact construction and operation as illustrated and described. Therefore, the embodiments described should be taken as illustrative, not restrictive, and the invention should not be limited to the details given herein but should be defined by the following claims and their full scope of equivalents, whether foreseeable or unforeseeable now or in the future.
|Cited Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US5479447||May 3, 1993||Dec 26, 1995||The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford, Junior University||Method and apparatus for adaptive, variable bandwidth, high-speed data transmission of a multicarrier signal over digital subscriber lines|
|US5832387||Dec 29, 1995||Nov 3, 1998||Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.||Adaptive power allocating method and apparatus for multicarrier transmission system|
|US6058162 *||Dec 5, 1997||May 2, 2000||Harris Corporation||Testing of digital subscriber loops using multi-tone power ratio (MTPR) waveform|
|US6061427 *||Jun 30, 1998||May 9, 2000||Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.||Transmission power control method in asymmetric digital subscriber line system|
|US6075821||Dec 16, 1997||Jun 13, 2000||Integrated Telecom Express||Method of configuring and dynamically adapting data and energy parameters in a multi-channel communications system|
|US6111936 *||Jan 28, 1999||Aug 29, 2000||Paradyne Corporation||Method and apparatus for automatically detecting and measuring distortion in a DSL system|
|US6236714 *||Jul 7, 1999||May 22, 2001||Centillium Communications, Inc.||Transmit power control for DSL modems in splitterless environment|
|US6292559||Sep 1, 1998||Sep 18, 2001||Rice University||Spectral optimization and joint signaling techniques with upstream/downstream separation for communication in the presence of crosstalk|
|US6356585 *||Sep 29, 1998||Mar 12, 2002||Conexant Systems, Inc.||Power cutback in splitterless ADSL systems|
|US6532277||Nov 12, 1999||Mar 11, 2003||Qwest Communications International Inc.||Method for controlling DSL transmission power|
|US6549520 *||May 17, 2000||Apr 15, 2003||Aware, Inc.||Method and apparatus for varying power levels in a multicarrier modem|
|US6580727||Aug 20, 1999||Jun 17, 2003||Texas Instruments Incorporated||Element management system for a digital subscriber line access multiplexer|
|US6636603||Jul 30, 1999||Oct 21, 2003||Cisco Technology, Inc.||System and method for determining the transmit power of a communication device operating on digital subscriber lines|
|US6647058||Jun 22, 1998||Nov 11, 2003||Paradyne Corporation||Performance customization system and process for optimizing XDSL performance|
|US6711207||Mar 13, 2000||Mar 23, 2004||Globespanvirata, Inc.||System and method for reduced power consumption in digital subscriber line modems|
|US6744811||Jun 12, 2000||Jun 1, 2004||Actelis Networks Inc.||Bandwidth management for DSL modem pool|
|US6785371 *||Oct 12, 1999||Aug 31, 2004||Conexant Systems, Inc.||Signaling mechanism for modem connection holding and reconnecting|
|US7035249||Mar 28, 2001||Apr 25, 2006||Intel Corporation||Optimizing bandwidth of DSL connections|
|US7106833||Mar 27, 2003||Sep 12, 2006||Telcordia Technologies, Inc.||Automated system and method for management of digital subscriber lines|
|US20020009155 *||Apr 18, 2001||Jan 24, 2002||Tzannes Marcos C.||Systems and methods for a multicarrier modulation system with a variable margin|
|US20020118652||Oct 19, 2001||Aug 29, 2002||Nadeem Ahmed||Method of optimal power distribution for communication systems|
|US20020136397||Feb 16, 2001||Sep 26, 2002||The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford Junior University||Crosstalk identification in xDSL systems|
|US20030031239||Aug 8, 2001||Feb 13, 2003||Posthuma Carl Robert||Maximizing DSL throughput|
|US20030086514||Jun 8, 2001||May 8, 2003||The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford Junior University||Dynamic digital communication system control|
|US20030123560||Nov 14, 2002||Jul 3, 2003||Jacobsen Krista S.||Method to mitigate effects of ISDN off/on transitions in ADSL|
|US20040034875||Jun 30, 2003||Feb 19, 2004||Brian Bulkowski||Method and apparatus for transmitting data in a data stream|
|US20040120390||Dec 23, 2002||Jun 24, 2004||Brown Carlton Ligar||Remote customer profile adaptive operating system|
|US20040161048||Feb 13, 2003||Aug 19, 2004||Broadcom Corporation||Method and apparatus for performing trellis coded modulation of signals for transmission on a TDMA channel of a cable network|
|US20050123027||Apr 2, 2004||Jun 9, 2005||Adaptive Spectrum And Signal Alignment, Inc.||DSL system estimation and parameter recommendation|
|US20050123028||Jul 19, 2004||Jun 9, 2005||Adaptive Spectrum And Signal Alignment, Inc.||Adaptive margin and band control|
|US20050190826||Feb 24, 2005||Sep 1, 2005||Alcatel||Digital subscriber line modem with bitloading using channel condition model|
|US20050213714||Mar 25, 2004||Sep 29, 2005||Globespan Virata Incorporated||MIMO dynamic PSD allocation for DSL networks|
|US20050220178||Dec 2, 2004||Oct 6, 2005||Texas Instruments Incorporated||Semi-distributed power spectrum control for digital subscriber line communications|
|US20050220179||Mar 30, 2004||Oct 6, 2005||Michail Tsatsanis||Iterative waterfiling with explicit bandwidth constraints|
|US20050237940||Apr 13, 2005||Oct 27, 2005||Bellsouth Intellectual Property Corporation||Adaptively applying a target noise margin to a DSL loop for DSL data rate establishment|
|US20050259725 *||May 5, 2005||Nov 24, 2005||Adaptive Spectrum And Signal Alignment, Inc.||FEXT determination system|
|US20060072722||Oct 5, 2004||Apr 6, 2006||Sbc Knowledge Ventures, L.P.||System and method for optimizing digital subscriber line based services|
|US20060159026||Jan 14, 2005||Jul 20, 2006||Sbc Knowledge Ventures L.P.||Method and apparatus for managing a quality of service for a communication link|
|US20060159106||Jan 18, 2005||Jul 20, 2006||Sbc Knowledge Ventures L.P.||System and method for managing broadband services|
|US20060164101||Dec 22, 2005||Jul 27, 2006||Alcatel||Test method and apparatus for in-house wiring problems|
|US20070280334||Dec 19, 2006||Dec 6, 2007||Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.||METHOD AND DEVICE FOR DYNAMIC SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT OF xDSL UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM SHARED FREQUENCY|
|CN1210399A||Jun 15, 1998||Mar 10, 1999||三星电子株式会社||Transmission power control method in asymmetrie digital subscriber line system|
|DE10001150A1||Jan 13, 2000||Jul 19, 2001||Siemens Ag||Transmission errors handling procedure esp. for ADSL-, and UDSL-, data transmission method e.g. with analog telephone and computer terminals - involves continual monitoring of data transmission for determining transmission errors, and measurement of bit-error rates for detecting any exceeding of threshold-amount prior to adaption procedure|
|EP1009135A2||Nov 30, 1999||Jun 14, 2000||Lucent Technologies Inc.||Dynamic bandwidth and symmetry allocation of digital subscriber line channels|
|EP1213848A1||Dec 10, 2001||Jun 12, 2002||Texas Instruments Incorporated||method of optimal power distribution for communication systems|
|EP1283655A1||Jun 24, 2002||Feb 12, 2003||Lucent Technologies Inc.||Maximizing DSL throughput with acceptable level of cross-talk|
|EP1699172A1||Mar 4, 2005||Sep 6, 2006||Alcatel Alsthom Compagnie Generale D'electricite||Method and apparatus for locating in-house wiring defects|
|EP1804450A1||Dec 30, 2005||Jul 4, 2007||STMicroelectronics Belgium N.V.||Allocating data in a multi-carrier digital subscriber line system|
|WO2001035611A1||Nov 10, 2000||May 17, 2001||Voyan Technology||Method and apparatus for cooperative diagnosis of impairments and mitigation of disturbers in communication systems|
|WO2001035614A1||Nov 10, 2000||May 17, 2001||Voyan Technology||Method and apparatus for the prediction and optimization in impaired communication systems|
|WO2003013109A1||Jul 31, 2002||Feb 13, 2003||Telcordia Tech Inc||Improved crosstalk identification for spectrum management in broadband telecommunications systems|
|WO2005036919A2||Oct 13, 2004||Apr 21, 2005||Wayne Thomas Daniel||Optimizing performance of a digital subscriber line|
|WO2007033579A1||Sep 15, 2006||Mar 29, 2007||Huawei Tech Co Ltd||An adaptive power adjustment method and means based on reducing crosstalk among dsl lines|
|WO2007044326A2||Oct 3, 2006||Apr 19, 2007||Adaptive Spectrum & Signal||Dsl system|
|1||A. Leshem, "Dynamic FDM and Dynamic DS Power Back-Off: A Simplified DSM Algorithm for Coexistence between RT and CO based deployments," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-284, Nov. 17, 2002 (9 pgs).|
|2||Cendrillon et al., "Optimal Multi-user Spectrum Management for Digital Subscriber Lines," 2004 IEEE International Conference on Communications; vol. 1; Jun. 20-24, 2004; ISBN: 0-7803-8533-0 (5 pgs).|
|3||Chan, Vincent M., et al., "Multiuser Spectrum Optimization for Discrete Multitone Systems with Asynchronous Crosstalk", IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 55, No. 11, Nov. 2007. University of Toronto, 11 pgs.|
|4||European Patent Office, "First Examination Report for EP Application No. 4801293.4", (Dec. 13, 2007), 5 pgs.|
|5||International Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT/US06/38605 mailed Nov. 17, 2008, 18 pgs.|
|6||International Search Report from International Application No. PCT/IB2006/000824, 4 pgs.|
|7||International Search Report, International Application No. PCT/IB2004/003960 (9 pgs).|
|8||ITU-T: "G.992.1: Asymmetric digital subscriber line (ADSL) transceivers" ITU-T Recommendation G.992.1; Jun. 1999, pp. 226-239 XP-002321806. (14 pages).|
|9||J. Cioffi (Editor), "Draft Sections 1 and 4 proposed, Dynamic Spectrum Management," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-040R1, Apr. 8, 2002 (4 pgs).|
|10||J. Cioffi et al., "10MDSL Beyond All Goals, and Spectrally Compatible with ADSL and VDSL, from CO or RTs," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-129, Apr. 8, 2002 (10 pgs).|
|11||J. Cioffi et al., "Autonomous DSM Mixture of Symmetric and Asymmetric Service: Bi-directional Iterative Waterfilling (at Level 0 or at Level 1).," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-058R1, Feb. 18, 2002 (9 pgs).|
|12||J. Cioffi et al., "Autonomous Level 0 DSM Results: iterative-water-filling for ADSL and VDSL," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-057, Feb. 18, 2002 (10 pgs).|
|13||J. Cioffi et al., "Channel Identification with Dynamic Spectrum Management," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-147, May 7, 2001 (8 pgs).|
|14||J. Cioffi et al., "Channel Identification with Dynamic Spectrum Management," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-147R1, Nov. 5, 2001 (9 pgs).|
|15||J. Cioffi et al., "Coordinated Level 2 DSM Results: Vectoring of multiple DSLs," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-059, Feb. 18, 2002 (8 pgs).|
|16||J. Cioffi et al., "Examples Improvements of Dynamic Spectrum Management," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-088, Feb. 19, 2001 (14 pgs).|
|17||J. Cioffi et al., "Indication of Capability to Release of Channel Information," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-146R2, Nov. 5, 2001 (3 pgs).|
|18||J. Cioffi et al., "Indication of Capability to Release of Channel Information," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-146RI, May 7, 2001 (3 pgs).|
|19||J. Cioffi et al., "Indication of Capability to Release of Channel Information," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-041, May 7, 2001 (3 pgs).|
|20||J. Cioffi et al., "Indication of Capability to Release of Channel Information," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-041R1, Apr. 8, 2002 (3 pgs).|
|21||J. Cioffi et al., "Indication of Capability to Release of Channel Information," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-041R3, Aug. 19, 2002 (4 pgs).|
|22||J. Cioffi et al., "Indication of Capability to Release of Channel Information," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-041R4, Nov. 18, 2002 (3 pgs).|
|23||J. Cioffi et al., "Iterative Waterfilling for Dynamic Spectrum Management," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-200R3, Aug. 20, 2001 (1 pg).|
|24||J. Cioffi et al., "Iterative Waterfilling for Dynamic Spectrum Management," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-200R5, Nov. 5, 2001 (14 pgs).|
|25||J. Cioffi et al., "'New Technology' in Spectrum Management," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-128, Apr. 8, 2002 (2 pgs).|
|26||J. Cioffi et al., "Proposed Scope and Mission for DSM(188)," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-188R2, Aug. 20, 2001 (4 pgs).|
|27||J. Cioffi et al., "Proposed Scope and Mission for DSM(188)," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-188R4, Nov. 5, 2001 (4 pgs).|
|28||J. Cioffi et al., "Proposed 'Stretch Goals' for 10MDSL," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-181, Aug. 19, 2002 (6 pgs).|
|29||J. Cioffi et al., "Proposed 'Stretch Goals' for 10MDSL," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-181R1, Aug. 19, 2002 (7 pgs).|
|30||J. Cioffi et al., "Response to 2001-273R1 using measured Verizon DSL SNRs," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-069, Feb. 18, 2002 (15 pgs).|
|31||J. Cioffi et al., "Some proposed Section 7.1 text for ADSL fixed-margin mode," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-176, Aug. 19, 2002 (3 pgs).|
|32||J. Cioffi et al., "Some proposed Section 7.1 text for ADSL fixed-margin mode," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-176R1, Nov. 18, 2002 (13 pgs).|
|33||J. Cioffi, "Proposal for Study of Dynamic Spectrum Management for the Evolving Unbundling Architecture of DSL," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-090, Feb. 19, 2001 (3 pgs).|
|34||J. Cioffi, "Unbundled DSL Evolution," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2001-088, Feb. 19, 2001 (6 pgs).|
|35||K. Kerpez et al., "Response to 2001-273R1 using Telcordia DSL Analysis," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-063R1, Feb. 18, 2002 (3 pgs).|
|36||K. Kerpez, "Jointly Optimizing DSL Spectra," ANSI Contribution T1E1.4/2002-231, Nov. 18, 2002 (12 pgs).|
|37||Kerpez, et al., "Advanced DSL Management", IEEE Communications Magazine; vol. 41, No. 11, XP-001177649, (Sep. 9, 2003), 116-123.|
|38||Kerpez, et al., IEEE Communications Magazine; vol. 40, No. 11., XP-001141239, (Nov. 11, 2002), 116-123.|
|39||Le Nir, Vincent , et al., "Optimal Power Allocation under Per-Modem Total Power and Spectral Mask Constraints in xDSL Vector Channels with Alien Crosstalk", ICASSP 2007, (Apr. 15, 2007), 4 pgs.|
|40||Liu, Yu-Sun , et al., "Distributed Dynamic Spectrum Management for Digital Subscriber Line", Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers (IEICE), vol. E90-B, No. 3, Mar. 2007, 491-498.|
|41||Patent Cooperation Treaty, "International Search Report and Written Opinion", International Application No. US2006/026796, (Apr. 10, 2007), 7 pgs.|
|42||*||Seong Taek Chung, "Rate and power control in a two-user multicarrier channel with no coordination: the optimal scheme vs. suboptimal methods", Vehicular Technology Conference, 2002, Proceedings, VTC 2002-Fall. 2002 IEEE 56th vol. 3, Sep. 24-28, 2002 pp. 1744-1748 vol. 3.|
|43||Song, et al., "Dynamic Spectrum Management for Next-Generation DSL Systems", IEEE Communications Magazine, XP-002395021, (Oct. 2002), 101-109.|
|44||State IP Office of P.R. China, "Notification of the First Office Action", Chinese Application No. 200480041317.4, (Mar. 7, 2008), 21 pgs.|
|45||W. Rhee, "Multiuser Wireless Communications with Multiple Antennas," Dissertation Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and the Committee on Graduate Studies of Stanford University, Jun. 2002 (129 pgs).|
|46||W. Yu, "Competition and Cooperation in Multi-user Communication Environments," Dissertation Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and the Committee on Graduate Studies of Stanford University, Jun. 2002 (120 pgs).|
|47||Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, International Application No. PCT/ IB2004/003960 (7 pgs).|
|48||Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority, International Application No. PCT/IB2006/000824, 7 pgs.|
|49||Yu et al., "Competitive Equilibrium in the Gaussian Interference Channel," IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT), Jun. 2000 (1 pg).|
|50||Yu et al., "Distributed Multiuser Power Control for Digital Subscriber Lines," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 20, No. 5, pp. 1105-1115; Jun. 2002 (11 pgs).|
|51||Yu et al., "Iterative Water-filling for Vector Multiple Access Channels," IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory, (ISIT), 2001 (1 pg).|
|52||Yu, Wei , et al., "Dual Methods for Nonconvex Spectrum Optimization for Multicarrier Systems", IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 54, No. 7, Jul. 2006, 1310-22.|
|53||Yu, Wei, et al., "On Constant Power Water-filling," IEEE, 0-7803-7097-1/01, (2001), pp. 1665-1669.|
|Citing Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US7889671 *||Jun 11, 2009||Feb 15, 2011||At&T Intellectual Property I, L.P.||Methods and apparatus to determine digital subscriber line configuration parameters|
|US8005977 *||Dec 19, 2006||Aug 23, 2011||Lantiq Deutschland Gmbh||Method and apparatus for transmitting data|
|US8160126 *||Apr 28, 2011||Apr 17, 2012||Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.||Method, device and system for upstream power back-off in digital subscriber line|
|US8406317 *||Oct 4, 2005||Mar 26, 2013||France Telecom||Device and a method for adjusting power spectral densities of a plurality of telecommunications lines|
|US8861640 *||Sep 28, 2009||Oct 14, 2014||Orange||Transmission method taking echo into account|
|US20090010421 *||Oct 4, 2005||Jan 8, 2009||France Telecom||Device and a Method for Adjusting Power Spectral Densities of a Plurality of Telecommunications Lines|
|US20110170633 *||Sep 28, 2009||Jul 14, 2011||France Telecom||Transmission method taking echo into account|
|US20110200087 *||Aug 18, 2011||Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.||Method, device and system for upstream power back-off in digital subscriber line|
|International Classification||H04L27/26, H04B1/38, H04L12/26, H04M1/24, H04B3/48, H04M11/06, H04L12/64, H04M3/30, H04B3/32, G06F, H04L12/24, H04L12/28, H04L1/00|
|Cooperative Classification||H04L41/145, H04M3/2209, H04M3/34, H04M11/062, H04L1/0019, H04M3/30, H04L1/0002, H04L2012/6478, H04L41/0853, H04L12/2874, H04B3/32, H04L12/2856, H04L43/106, H04L43/00, H04L43/0847, Y02B60/31, H04L12/6418, H04L43/16, H04L43/0829, H04L43/0894, H04L43/0888, H04L41/0806, H04L27/2608, H04M3/304, H04L12/2898|
|European Classification||H04L41/08A1, H04L41/14A, H04L43/08E1, H04L43/16, H04L43/00, H04L43/08G3, H04L41/08B1, H04L27/26M1P, H04L12/26, H04B3/32, H04M11/06B, H04L12/64B, H04M3/30M4, H04L12/28P1D3, H04L1/00A1, H04L1/00A8S, H04L12/28P1D1B|
|Dec 8, 2004||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: ADAPTIVE SPECTRUM AND SIGNAL ALIGNMENT, INC., CALI
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:CIOFFI, JOHN M.;RHEE, WONJONG;REEL/FRAME:016056/0062
Effective date: 20041118
|Jan 7, 2013||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 4
|Jan 13, 2015||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: PARTNERS FOR GROWTH IV, L.P., CALIFORNIA
Free format text: SECURITY INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:ADAPTIVE SPECTRUM AND SIGNAL ALIGNMENT, INCORPORATED;REEL/FRAME:034760/0220
Effective date: 20150112